The present invention relates generally to the field of electronic article surveillance, and in particular, to a means for deactivating an electronic article surveillance system which is compatible and indeed combinable with existing point-of-sale data capturing systems.
An inevitable part of modern retailing is the problem of so-called inventory shrinkage. This problem leads to significant costs, which are in turn passed on to the consumer, creating both significant problems for the retail establishment and material cost increases to the public in general. For this reason, there have been significant efforts to develop electronic article surveillance devices which are capable of dealing with this problem of inventory shrinkage.
Generally speaking, this is accomplished by applying a special tag or label to the articles which are stocked by a retail establishment, and by providing electronic equipment which is capable of detecting when such tags or labels pass in its vicinity. A variety of different types of tags or labels have been developed for this purpose, including rigid (so-called "hard") tags which are generally applied to the goods by special fasteners, as well as flexible tags (e.g., labels or hang-tags) which can be applied to the goods using more conventional means.
Irrespective of its form, the tag or label which is used is generally provided with an internally disposed stimulus which is capable of exciting the associated apparatus. This often takes the form of a circuit which is capable of reacting with a specified field to cause a detectable event which can then provide a warning signal. This general approach has been used in connection with magnetic, radio frequency and microwave systems to provide electronic article surveillance in a variety of different retail settings.
In operation, the selected tag or label is applied to the goods in appropriate fashion. Once applied to the goods, an unauthorized attempt to remove such articles from the retail establishment will cause the electronic article surveillance equipment (which is traditionally stationed near the point of exit from the retail establishment) to detect the presence of the tag or label, and the goods with which it is associated, providing an alarm which is capable of alerting the retail establishment of the attempted removal.
However, it is unavoidable that a similar signal will also be produced each time a customer properly removes purchased goods from that same retail establishment, or enters another retail establishment with similar equipment. For this reason, it becomes desirable to take appropriate steps to "defeat" those tags or labels which are applied to goods which have been purchased by customers of the retail establishment. A variety of different techniques had been developed to accomplish this task, often relating to the type of tag or label which was used.
For example, hard tags are customarily defeated by physically removing them from the goods, once purchased. This generally necessitates the use of a special device for removing the pins which hold the hard tags to the goods. Hang-tags can simply be cut or torn from the goods, once purchased. Labels applied to the goods can be defeated by covering them (and the circuit which they contain) with a so-called "Thank You" tag which incorporates a foil (e.g., of aluminum) capable of inhibiting interaction between the label and the electronic article surveillance equipment of the retail establishment.
Each of these techniques permits a customer to remove purchased goods from a given retail establishment. However, each of these techniques was found to exhibit its own particular disadvantages. For example, the hard tags tended to leave unacceptable marks in the goods, resulting from the attaching pins. Cutting or tearing the hang-tags from the goods often resulted in a loss of traditionally provided information (size, description, price, etc.) pertaining to the goods which the consumer would later require. The "Thank You" tags would at times fall off, leading to a compromised result, and also tended to alert the public to the use of the security device, inviting attempts to abrogate the security measures which had been taken. In any event, these systems generally required additional and separate operations, leading to a slowing of the check-out process and a potential for human error (in forgetting to defeat the tag or label).
Recognizing this, steps were taken to develop more convenient tag/label defeating systems which would effectively assure proper deactivation of the security device following a legitimate purchase, without compromising the effectiveness of the overall system. One such system is the Counterpoint.RTM. deactivation system which is manufactured by Checkpoint Systems Inc. of Thorofare, N.J. This deactivation system makes use of specially configured tags or labels in connection with an apparatus for positively deactivating such tags or labels in an efficient and secure manner. To this end, a tag (or label) of the type described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,498,076 (George J. Lichtblau) is provided with a resonant circuit having a capacitor portion that is provided with an indentation which permits the resonant circuit to be deactivated as described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,728,938 (George W. Kaltner), for example. The described tag and deactivation system combine to provide a tag or label which ordinarily operates in the manner previously described, to prevent the unauthorized removal of an article from a retail establishment, but which is readily deactivated at the point of sale by subjecting the tag or label to a relatively high power signal which, because of the mechanical indentation which is provided, is sufficient to cause a short circuit within the tag or label to thereby deactivate it.
However, even this enhanced system continued to require a separate deactivation procedure at the point of sale, to permit the removal of purchased goods from the retail establishment. It became apparent that such deactivation procedures could be significantly enhanced (i.e., simplified and more reliably performed) if they could be made part of the traditional operations which occur in connection with a retail sales transaction. For example, in more traditional settings it was found that such assurances were provided by placing the deactivation apparatus directly upon the check-out counter, adjacent to the cash register, so that the deactivation procedure could be incorporated into the check-out procedure, or even the bagging procedure which would then follow.
Such measures proved to be more difficult in connection with some of the more advanced point-of-sale, data capturing devices which have recently been developed for inventory control purposes and the like. One such device which has found wide acceptance makes use of standardized bar codes applied to the various products, and takes steps to read such bar codes and then cross-reference the acquired information with an appropriate data base for developing pricing or inventory controls. Two of the more popular approaches which have been developed to read bar codes of this type and which have found particular acceptance in the industry are the so-called "slot scanners", and "hand-held" or "gun-type" scanners.
The slot scanners generally make use of an apparatus (e.g., a laser scanner) for reading bar codes which is disposed beneath the check-out counter, adjacent to the point-of-sale equipment, to read bar code information as the article provided with the tag or label is passed over the unit. Such devices are often found in supermarkets and department stores, and an example of such equipment is the Model 750F bar code scanner which is manufactured by Spectra-Physics, Inc. of Eugene, Oreg. The hand-held or gun-type scanners generally make use of a similar procedure (i.e., laser scanning) to read such bar codes, with the primary difference that the scanning device is incorporated into a hand held "gun" which can be directed toward the article provided with the tag or label to read the bar code information which is provided. Such devices are often found in drug stores, convenience stores and the like, and an example of such equipment is the LS-7000 II bar code scanner which is manufactured by Symbol Technologies, Inc. of Bohemia, N.Y.
It therefore became desirable to incorporate a tag/label deactivation system used in electronic article surveillance into such point-of-sale, data-capturing systems, including those of the type generally described above.